Appeal No. 2002-2092
Application 09/328,467
Figure 4A of Passaniti using a male and female mold assembly as
very generally taught in Yamaguchi or in appellants’ prior art
Figures 8 and 9, we find no basis in such prior art for a method
as recited in appellants’ claim 5 on appeal including a mold
assembly having the features set forth in claim 5, i.e., a male
mold having formed therein an injection gate “open at the top of
the cylindrical space,” and “at least any one of an ejector
sleeve formed on the female mold at the bottom of the cylindrical
space and an ejector pin formed in the curved space.”
Accordingly, we find that the examiner has failed to establish a
prima facie case of obviousness, and for that reason, will not
sustain the rejection of claims 5 and 6 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a).
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007